Vie  RURAL  NEW-YORKER 
343 
Another  Comparison  of  Milk  Prices 
The  following  comparison  of  prices  received  for  milk 
by  patrons  of  the  Sulphur  Springs  cheese  factory,  with 
the  net  returns  received  by  patrons  of  Sheffield  Farms 
and  also  of  the  pooling  association  were  made  for  my 
own  information  and  guide.  There  is  nothing  confiden¬ 
tial  about  any  of  them.  The  figures  are  accurate  and 
public.  They  are  brought  together  here  for  comparison. 
The  cheese  factory  prices  are  important,  because  they 
show  the  possibility  in  butter  and  cheese  as  an  outlet 
for  milk.  The  only  way  I  can  safeguard  my  interests 
is  by  comparisons  of  the  ways  and  means  offered  me 
for  the  sale  of  my  milk. 
•  SULPHUR  SPRING  CHEESE  FACTORY 
Jacob  Yousey,  Maker  and  Salesman 
April  1-15 . ? 
Cheese  sold  for 
.  .$0,161^-80.16 
April  16-30 . 
.  .  .16%- 
.15% 
.16 
Average  . 
Mav  1-15 . 
May  16-31 . 
..  .16%- 
•  ■  .17%- 
.15% 
•17% 
Average  . 
June  1-15 . 
.  .  .18%- 
.20% 
.19 
°1 
Average  . 
July  1-15 . 
July  16-31 . 
•  •  .21%- 
.  .21%- 
.20  - 
.21% 
.21 
.19% 
Average  . 
August  1-15 . 
August  16-31 . 
..  .20%- 
.20% 
.  .  .19%- 
.21  - 
•21% 
.19 
•21% 
.20% 
Average  . . 
September  1-15.  . .  . 
September  16-30.  .  . 
.22%- 
•  .  .24%- 
23%  - 
■23% 
.23% 
.23 
•22% 
•22% 
Average  . 
October  1-15 . 
October  16-31 . . 
.  .  .23%- 
•  •  .24% 
.25 
A  verage  . 
Butter 
sold  for 
$0.30 
.35 
Net  price 
100  lbs. 
3%  milk 
$1.21 
Net 
Price  S.F. 
Co.  paid  for 
8%  B.  milk. 
Lowville 
Above 
cheese 
•Ot) 
1.213 
$1.21 
$1.68 
$0.47 
.35 
.35 
$1,229 
1.355 
$1,292 
1.68 
.3SS 
.35 
.35 
$1,503 
1.681 
$1,592 
1.5S 
.012 
.35 
$1,683 
.40 
1.657 
$1.67 
2.03 
.36 
.40 
$1,611 
.40 
1.613 
$1,612 
2.48 
.863 
.40 
$1,798 
.40 
2.026 
$1,912 
2.4S 
.568 
.40 
.45 
$2.08 
2.19 
$2,135 
2.505 
.37 
Lowville,  N.  Y. 
Cash  price 
D.  League 
paid  for 
3%  B.  milk, 
Lowville 
Below 
cheese 
Average 
factory 
price  100 
lbs.  milk 
Lbs.  milk 
to 
lb.  cheese 
$1,328 
11.25 
1.338 
11.13 
$1.15 
$0.06 
$1,333 
$1  34 
1.55 
11.30 
10.67 
1.115 
.177 
$1,445 
$1.64 
1.826 
1 0.83 
10.91 
1.16 
.432 
$1,738 
$1,844 
11.09 
1.82 
10.98 
1.335 
.335 
$1,832 
$1,802 
10.72 
1.835 
10.80 
1.52 
.092 
$1.8185 
$2  044 
10.14 
2.27 
9.77 
1.765 
.147 
$2,157 
* 
$2.37 
2.522 
9.75 
9.46 
.  1.925 
.21 
$2,446 
Cheese  factory  figures  taken  from  actual  dividend  statements  issued  to  patrons. 
Net  prices  paid  by  Sheffield  Farms  Company,  Inc.,  taken  from  actual  dividend  statements  issued  to  patrons. 
Dairymen’s  League  Co-operative  Association,  Inc.,  pool  figures  taken  from  monthly  statements  printed  in  the 
Dairymen’s  League  News. 
Comparison  of  net  prices  received  by  patrons  at  cheese  factory,  with  cash  net  prices  received  by  patrons 
of  Sheffield  Farms  Company,  Inc.  Cash  net  prices  received  by  patrons  of  the  Dairymen’s  League  Co-operative 
Association. 
Net  price 
paid  patrons  Sulphur 
Spring  cheese  factory 
for  100  lbs.  3%  milk 
April  .  $1.2,1 
Mav  .  1-292 
.Tune  .  1.592 
•July  .  1.67 
August  .  1.612 
September  .  1.912 
October  .  2.135 
Net  price  Sheffield 
farms  Co.  paid  for 
100  lbs.  3%  grade 
B.  milk.  Lowville  Above  cheese  factory 
$1 .68 
$0.47 
1 .68 
.388 
1 .58 
*.012 
2.08 
.36 
2.48 
.868 
2.48 
.568 
2.505 
.37 
Cash  price  Dairy¬ 
men’s  League  paid  for 
*  Below 
3%  B.  milk.  Lowville 
cheese  faeti 
$1.15 
$0.06 
1.115 
.177 
1.16 
.432 
1.335 
.335 
1.52 
.092 
1.765 
.147 
1.925 
.21 
*  Less. 
Total  dividends,  four  farms 
1921.  May  1  to  October  31,  inclusive . 
Non-pool  gain,  six-month  period . 
1921,  November  1  to  April  30.  1922.  inclusive 
Non-pool  gain,  six-month  period . 
Cash  dividend,  Sheffield  Farms  Co.,  Inc.,  Lowville 
Grade  A.  Grade  B. 
$9,498.16  $8,410.32 
$2,898.53  $1,810.69 
5.469.77  4.786.66 
1.717.17  1. 034.06 
Cash  div’d, 
Dairymen’s 
League 
Co  op. 
Ass’n,  Inc.. 
Lowville. 
Grade  R. 
$6,599.63 
3.752.60 
Total  non-pool  gain  for  year.  .  . 
1922,  May  1  to  October  31,  inclusive.  . 
Non-pool  gain,  six-month  period . 
$4,615.70 
$8,747.49  $7,733.81 
$3,323.10 
$2,844.75 
$5,424.39 
$2,309.42 
c.  y.  b. 
Weather  in  Southern  Ohio 
SEEING  your  reference  to  severe  Winter  in  New 
York  and  nearby  States.  I  call  to  your  mind 
that  here  along  the  Ohio  River  we  have  had  very 
mild  weather  nearly  all  the  time,  and  one  of  our  local 
papers  has  often  referred  to  the  fact  that  our  climate 
has  been  as  nice  as  Florida  and  California  this 
Winter.  We  have  had  several  snows,  but  the  deep¬ 
est  was  less  than  half  an  inch,  and  the  others  just 
enough  to  show  white  on  the  ground.  One  morning 
the  temperature  was  down  to  six  to  eight  above 
zero,  and  we  have  had  a  good  many  mornings  with 
some  freezing  and  thaw-out  during  the  day.  We 
had  little  rain  in  early  Winter,  but  for  a  month  it 
has  been  quite  rainy  and  cloudy.  We  have  had 
very  few  days  of  real  warm  weather  so  far,  and  the 
warmest  were  cloudy,  so  the  fruit  buds  have  hardly 
swelled  any  yet  that  one  can  notice.  Peaches  and 
all  other  fruits  would  stand  a  real  hard  freeze  as 
they  are  now. 
People  have  remarked  that  more  plowing  had 
been  done  in  the  early  Winter  than  they  had  ever 
known  around  here.  It  has  been  too  wet,  though, 
for  a  month  to  plow  any.  Since  it  is  so  wet.  and 
the  roads  not  frozen,  we  are  in  for  some  real  bad 
roads  to  follow,  as  they  are  soft  underneath,  and 
the  travel  is  loosening  up  the  foundation  and  wear¬ 
ing  it  out  faster  than  it  can  be  fixed.  It  is  the 
common  thing;  the  roads  were  not  built  for  traffic 
as  heavy  as  they  have  been  subjected  to,  and  as 
fast  as  the  money  can  be  secured  they  will  have  to 
be  rebuilt,  and  we  will  have  to  put  up  with  the  mire 
in  wet  weather  till  better  roads  can  be  built. 
There  has  been  considerable  pruning  done  in  the 
orchards,  anil  growers  are  planning  to  do  a  better 
job  trying  to  clean  up  on  the  San  Jos£  scale  this 
Spring.  It  seems  we  had  a  goodly  number  of  para¬ 
sites  working  on  the  scales  a  few  years  ago,  and  the 
spraying  that  was  done  then  reduced  the  scales  to 
a  minimum  and  the  parasites  about  finished  them 
then,  and  since  then  the  parasites  have  literally 
starved  to  death,  and  the  spraying  was  done  in 
more  of  a  hurry  or  reckless  manner,  and  the  scales 
have  made  a  good  start  again  under  such  treatment. 
With  no  parasites  to  prey  on  them,  the  growers 
have  become  alarmed  about  the  situation.  Some  are 
going  to  continue  the  lime-sulphur  solution  and 
others  are  going  to  try  the  red  engine  oil  emulsion 
on  apples.  They  should  remember  it  is  thorough 
application  of  the  proper  remedy  that  does  the  job. 
Lawrence  Co.,  O.  v.  t.  cox. 
Candid  Talk  from  a  “Sportsman” 
The  Rockland  County  (N.  Y. )  Farm  Bureau  recently 
held  a  meeting  to  discuss  the  game  laws.  Hunters, 
farmers,  “sportsmen,”  were  all  invited.  Among  other 
speakers  was  A.  M.  Gage,  a  Federal  game  inspector. 
IL'  assured  the  assemblage  that  the  sportsmen  were 
willing  to  co-operate  with  the  farmers  in  bringing  to 
justice  the  lawless  element  among  the  hunters — though 
the  law  licenses  the  man  who  will  tear  down  your  stone 
wall  to  get  a  rabbit,  just  the  same  as  it  does  the  one 
who  belongs  to  some  rod  and  gun  club,  and  makes  a 
great  parade  of  only  hunting  for  the  joy  of  killing  some 
defenceless  little  bird  or  animal.  However,  the  speaker 
soon  wandered  somewhat  from  his  text  and  said  some 
illuminating  things  of  vital  interest  to  farmers  all  over 
the  State. 
In  reply  to  a  question  regarding  instructions  to  shoot 
“vermin,”  under  which  head  house  cats,  hawks,  owls, 
and  some  other  things  come,  the  speaker  admitted  that 
he  was  aware  that  “a  farmer’s  cat  in  its  killing  of  ro¬ 
dents  might  be  worth  hundreds  of  dollars  to  the  farmer; 
but  as  they  alto  kill  some  game,  they  (the  limiters) 
were  instructed  to  kill  them.” 
He  further  stated,  while  speaking  of  some  projected 
changes  in  the  game  law:  “The  sportsmen  are  for 
them,  and  you  can  make  up  your  mind  that  they  will 
get  about  what  they  want,  regardless  of  what  the  farm¬ 
ers  think.” 
When  questioned  along  that  line  by  an  astounded  lis¬ 
tener  who  wanted  to  make  sure  that  (he  statement  had 
been  really  made  as  quoted  above,  he  reiterated  the 
statement,  adding  in  explanation  that  the  sportsmen, 
numbering  about  75.000  in  the  State,  were  organized, 
and  that  the  men  who  were  candidates  for  the  Legis¬ 
lature  last  Fall,  and  who  were  endorsed  by  (lie  sports¬ 
men,  were  all  elected. 
As  a  speaker  to  a  meeting  largely  composed  of  fann¬ 
ers,  Mr.  Gage  left  a  little  something  to  be  desired  in  the 
way  of  tact;  but  as  a  source  of  first-hand  information 
nothing  better  could  be  desired. 
Farmers  of  New  York  State,  are  we  going  to  let  an 
organization  of  75,000  members  rob  us  of  our  rights  in 
our  own  farms  and  homesteads?  If  organization  is  our 
danger,  so  is  it  our  protection.  We  must  do  it  ourselres. 
Let  us,  as  Farm  Bureaus.  Granges,  and  as  individ¬ 
uals,  communicate  with  our  legislators  to  the  effect 
that  no  present  bars  to  the  hunting  business  be  let 
down;  and  that  the;  laws  may  be  changed  to  make  any¬ 
one  hunting  on  property  other  than  his  own  a  tres¬ 
passer  unless  lie  has  a  written  consent  of  the  owner. 
We  should  also  have  the  right  to  raise  and  market 
quail  and  pheasants,  and  things  of  that  description, 
just  as  freely  as  we  do  poultry. 
f  MRS.  ]  EDNA  C.  JONES. 
Farm  Earnings  in  the  Corn  Belt 
So  much  has  been  said  during  the  past  year  or  two  as 
to  the  financial  condition  of  various  classes  of  farmers 
that  some  actual  figures  on  the  earnings  of  a  group  of 
corn  belt  farmers  may  not  be  amiss.  A  representative 
group  of  men  in  one  of  the  Western  Ohio  counties  have 
been  keeping  accurate  records  since  1919.  This  gives 
us  complete  figures  for  four  years  on  the  same  group  of 
farms.  Two  of  these  years  were  about  as  prosperous 
as  Ohio  farmers  have  experienced,  while  the  other  two 
have,  as  the  following  figures  show,  been  far  from  satis¬ 
factory  : 
1919  1920  1921  1922 
Total  farm  receipts...  .$4,634  $4,139  $2,867  $2,716 
Total  farm  expenses...  1,888  1,948  1,621  1,641 
Net  farm  income.  .$2,751  $2,191  $1,246  $1,075 
As  can  be  seen,  1910  was  the  best  year  of  the  four, 
expenses  were  not  as  great  as  iu  1920,  and  the  receipts 
were  $500  greater.  As  far  as  actual  net  cash  income 
is  concerned,  1922  was  a  poorer  year  than  1921.  Dur¬ 
ing  the  four  years  there  has  been  relatively  little  change 
in  farm  expenses,  while  receipts  have  decreased  almost 
$2,000  per  farm. 
In  1922  the  average  cash  income  was  $1,075.  This 
means  that  the  average  farmer  in  this  group  had 
slightly  over  $1,000  from  his  year’s  operations  with 
which  to  pay  for  groceries  and  clothes  for  his  family, 
and  besides  to  meet  interest  payments  on  his  mortgage. 
These  farms  averaged  128  acres  in  size,  and  were  valued 
by  their  owners  at  $150  per  acre,  including  improve¬ 
ments.  When  the  value  of  live  stock,  machinery,  etc., 
is  added  to  the  real  estate  valuation,  this  gives  an  invest¬ 
ment  of  approximately  $23,000  per  farm.  On  this  in¬ 
vestment  the  average  man  made  in  1922  no  return  for 
his  labor  at  all.  if  we  say  that  a  5  per  cent  return 
should  be  earned  by  the  capital,  or,  figuring  another 
way,  he  made  approximately  4%  per  cent  as  a  return 
for  his  capital,  labor  and  management. 
To  this  $1,075  cash  income  of  this  average  farmer,  if 
we  would  compare  it  with  his  city  cousin,  we  must  add 
a  fair  allowance  for  house  rent  and  the  value  of  the 
farm  produce  which  the  farm  furnishes  toward  the 
living  of  the  family.  Even  then,  however,  to  the  man 
who  is  heavily  in  debt  with  payments  of  interest  to 
meet  on  his  mortgage,  the  cash  income  is  hardly  enough 
for  him  to  keep  his  head  above  water.  Improvement 
iu  prices  must  come  rapidly  if  many  of  our  farmers, 
particularly  those  who  went  heavily  in  debt  during  the 
war  time  inflation,  are  to  escape  disaster.  R.  F.  TABER. 
How  About  the  Horse? 
As  the  question  of  a  wider  track  for  sleighs  is  again 
coining  to  the  front,  permit  me  to  ask  this  question  :  If 
sleighs  were  made  wide  enough  to  permit  autos  to  run 
in  their  track,  where  on  earth  would  a  horse  travel? 
Certainly  they  could  not  travel  in  the  wheel  track, 
which  would  be  gouged  nearly  if-  not  quite  to  the  ground 
and  if  they  Kent  in  their  own  track  near  the  tongue,  the 
track  would  gradually  fill  in  and  become  so  high  that 
neither  sleigh  nor  auto  could  pass  over.  R.  H.  8. 
Sodus,  N.  Y. 
